A CDA Approach to Translation Quality Assessment: A Case Study of Lost Symbol

开篇：润墨网以专业的文秘视角，为您筛选了一篇A CDA Approach to Translation Quality Assessment: A Case Study of Lost Symbol范文，如需获取更多写作素材，在线客服老师一对一协助。欢迎您的阅读与分享！

[a]Department of Translation Studies， Science and Research Branch， Islamic Azad University， Fars， Iran.

[b]Department of English Language Teaching， Islamic Azad University， Jahrom Branch， Jarhom， Iran.

* Corresponding author.

Email：

Received 16 August 2013； accepted 6 December 2013

Abstract

Translation Quality Assessment （TQA） is the pivotal point of this study with a focus on discourse and mainly Critical Discourse Analysis （cda） in order to find out how far it is possible to transfer discourse as a culture based concept from source community into the target community. This transfer is regarded as a yardstick to assess the translator’s overall accomplishment and the quality of the translation as well. For the same purpose Van Dijk CDA Framework（2004） has been used to assess the Farsi translation of Dan Brown’s novel Lost Symbol which has been done by Hosein Shahrabi. A thorough comparison between the selected data from the source text and the related translations in term of the discursive/pragmatic strategies and the results of Chi-Square Tests showed that the transfer of discourse from source into the target is possible with the least of deviations and the fact that discourse is a concept rooted in the culture of the people and parties involved in the act of translation， would not hinder the efforts put by the translators to create the same discourse in the target society for the end readers. The safe transfer of discourse from source into the target is considered to be the main yardstick for the assessment of translation quality under this study.

Key words： Translation quality assessment； Critical discourse analysis； CDA； TQA； Discourse； Critical discourse analysis； Assessment； Van Dijk CDA Framework

Fatemeh Soltani， Azadeh Nemati （2013）. A CDA approach to translation quality assessment： A case study of lost symbol. Studies in Literature and Language， 7（3）， 60-72. Available from： http：//www. /index.php/sll/article/view/j.sll.1923156320130703.3929 DOI： http：///10.3968/j.sll.1923156320130703.3929

INTRODUCTION

Quality assessment is a vital process in any field of study and action and more specifically in the field of translation where no practical methods of assessment are easily manageable and subjective or biased judgments can be seen widely.

Different scholars from different schools of thought view the concept of translation evaluation from different perspectives. House （2001） in her summarization included mentalists who had some subjective and intuitive evaluations. They believed that texts have no core meaning and their meanings change depending on the position of each of the individual speakers. Elsewhere she included behavioristic scholars who aimed at a more scientific way of evaluating translations dismissing the translator’s mental actions as belonging to what they call it a black box. Nida （1964） who was a supporter of this school of thought took the readers’ reactions to translation as the main yardstick for assessing a translation’s quality.

Functionalists such as Reiss and Vermeer （1984） claimed that skopos or purpose of a translation is the main item for qualifying a translation. The way target culture norms are treated/manipulated by a translation is the crucial yardstick in evaluating a translation （House， 2001）.

In text and discourse based approaches， translation was evaluated mainly in terms of its forms and functions in the target （receiving） culture and literature （Toury， 1995）. The source was subordinate to the target and what mattered was that translation is accepted as a tangible original work（and not a translation） in the target culture.

Post modernists who were included in the text and discourse based approaches including Venuti （1995） tried to critically examine translation practices from a psychophilosophical and socio-political point of view in order to unmask unequal power relations which are produced， reproduced， understood and manifested in different ways by different people and parties （House， 2001）.

According to House （2001）， if meaning is followed and explored from an externally observable reaction， translation evaluation is likely to involve response-based methods. However if it is seen as emerging from larger units， involving both context and （situational and cultural） context surrounding individual linguistic units， a discourse approach is likely to be used in evaluating a translation.

Discourse and critical discourse analysis （CDA） which is recently a widely used concept in the field of translation studies and evaluation：

Aims to systematically explores often opaque relationships of causality and determination between a discursive practice， events and texts and （or） wider social and cultural structures， relations and processes； to investigate how such practices， events and texts arise out of and are ideologically shaped by relations of power and struggles over power； and to explore how the opacity of these relationships between discourse and society is itself a factor securing power and hegemony. （Fairclough， 1993， p. 135）

One of the main researchers who provided great contributions to the field of CDA is Van Dijk. His CDA framework （2004） which includes some tens of discursive and pragmatic strategies is a comprehensive asset which has been used widely recently in translation studies researches to account for the translation decisions made by the translators.

However CDA is commonly not used as a medium for the evaluation of the translation quality.Recent researches are mostly done with the purpose of making comparison between the source and target texts to see how discourse changed in source and target and how manipulations were happened.

The researcher under this current study tried to fill this gap by introducing CDA into the field of TQA and by using discourse as a medium to evaluate the translation quality.

1. BACKGROUND

1.1 Translation Quality Assessment

Evaluation is a need for any performances and the products or the results of any job in order to assess the quality of the final output. Michael Scriven （2007）， a leading evaluation researcher， defines evaluation as：

The process of determining merit， worth， or significance； an evaluation is a product of that process. Professional evaluation is evaluation done in a systematic and objective way with a degree of expertise that requires extensive specific training or learning. The logic of evaluation is concerned with （i） how， if at all， professional evaluation is possible； （ii） its nature and its location in the organization of knowledge， and （iii） the logical structure of its inferences. （p. 2）

Consequently it is needed to define sets of values， worth or significances to be the basis of the evaluation and judgment in the field of translation.

Translation quality was long time assessed based on its being grammatically correct without taking into consideration the source text or units larger than sentence and also the context. The focus of this grammatical approach was the linguistic aspect of translation. During this time， translation studies were “clearly defined as a sub-discipline of applied linguistics and it was then that the concept of equivalence became a key concept of translation studies” （Cyrus， 2009， p. 88）.

However as Catford pointed out， “the central problem of translation-practice is that of finding TL equivalents. A central task of translation theory is that of defining the nature and conditions of translation equivalence” （1965， p. 73）， while it was not easily possible to have a generally accepted definition or sets of criteria for this concept.

1.2 Equivalence and TQA

Views toward this concept started from some very linguistic based approaches such as those belong to Savory （1957） in The Art of Translation who talked of equivalence in a rather contradictory way as he believed a translation should render the words of the original and the ideas of the original as well. This way the translator shall seek a complete rebuild of the source into the target language， keeping the same linguistic form and semantic content. Following this definition， the slightest of deviations from the source would result in a defective translation， which can happen in almost all cases.

This goes on to some more target oriented scholars such as Toury （1980） according to whom translation was designed to primarily fill a need in the target culture； therefore it is logical to assume the target system as the object of the study. Thus， his approach towards equivalence was a target and product oriented one. He named equivalence as functional relational， following the assumption that translation is the replacement of one message， which is encoded in one natural language， by an equivalent message， encoded in another language.

According to Snell-Hornby （1988）：

For the last 150 years， the word equivalence in English has been used as a technical term in different kinds of exact sciences to refer to a number of scientific phenomena or processes. In mathematics， it indicates a relationship of absolute equality that involves guaranteed reversibility. At the same time， however， it can also be used as a common word in the general vocabulary of English， and， in this sense， it means of similar significance. In other words， the word equivalence is used in the English language both as a scientific term and as a common word. （p. 17）

However this is somehow not possible to find two things to be completely identical， especially in case of a descriptive field of study like translation， where no pure statistical or mathematical procedures are easily applicable to show the amount of equivalence between different linguistic items. Nida （1986） also addressed this same issue this way：

There are no two stones alike， no flowers the same， and no two people who are identical. Although the structures of the DNA in the nucleus of their cells may be the same， such persons nevertheless differ as the result of certain developmental factors. No two sounds are ever exactly alike， and even the same person pronouncing the same words will never utter it in an absolutely identical manner. （p. 60）

However， since translation is a kind of communication between at least two languages， involving two different source and target cultures， receivers and communities， therefore it is needed to have equivalence in some ways and by some degrees so that it is possible to judge if a translation is well understandable in the target society and the intended meaning and thought are transferred， before it is feasible to assess the amount of success of such a transfer.

The focus of this study was on the definition of translation， in essence， as a kind of communication. In history， translation has always functioned as a bridge for people who do not know foreign languages to understand the source text. As a matter of fact， translators and translation theorists worldwide have long realized the essence of translation as a kind of communication. Nida（1995） has said that translating means communication. Professor Fan Zhongying has also expressed the same opinion， saying that “translation is a language activity， the cardinal aim of which is to communicate” （Fan Zhongying， 1994， p. 9）.

Therefore， the focus of this study was on the definition of translation， in essence， as a kind of communication.

Accordingly a purely linguistic orientation towards translation and equivalence could never win this competition. Translation is an act of communication， and equivalence in its best and most ideal mode can be the manifestation of this communication between the two culturally distinct groups of senders and receivers. This communication will take place if the intended meanings or in this case， thoughts and intentions of the author， are reflected in the translator’s final job.

In order to find out if such reflections actually happen， the researcher shall step away from the purely linguistic approaches.

Discourse and pragmatics are key tools which can help to fill such a gap， however these concepts are much disputed topics among linguists， since they are combined together and shared so many values in detail， but there is a general consensus on the idea that discourse is an organized set of utterances reflecting or in relation with an organized set of thoughts. Also pragmatics can be described as the appropriate use of language in context. However， these definitions are so imprecise and it is needed to explain more on the nature of these two concepts and how they are tied together for the purpose of this study.

2. DISCOURSE AND CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS

There have been many definitions given for discourse by various scholars. It can range from linguistic views to sociological， philosophical and other disciplines and views. According to Titscher et.al （2000， p. 17） “it integrates a whole palette of meanings”. The views of Van Dijk （1993） have been adopted for the purpose of this study， in which he conceptualized discourse as text in context， which is “data that is liable for empirical analysis” （Titscher et.al， 2000， p. 23）. In his view， the focus was put on discourse as actions and processes and in a wider sense， the text alone. Here， text is a part of social interactions in a wider process （Fairclough， 1989）.

Different traditions of discourse analysis have been derived from different interpretations of the meaning of discourse （Mills， 1997）. Linguistic traditions defined discourse solely as the units of written and spoken communication under study and focused on the content of texts and conversations， which was not the preferred notion of this study. Other social science traditions defined discourse as being derived from and dependent on social practices， the complex mix of cultural norms， disciplines and rituals， which govern discursive formations （Hajer， 1995）. This last tradition is what has been focused on for the purpose of this study.

Social practices create sets of rules which work together to create discourses. In this case it is needed to view discourse as a concept encompasses social practices and ultimately get to know how discourses are formed and shaped， also the possibility of contrasting sets of influences producing divergent discourses.

Meaning， equivalence， and evaluation can’t be seen apart from power relations， ideological manipulations and hegemony， terms which forward us to CDA and the fact that how a single reality can be viewed by different people who belong to different cultural， ideological， political or religious families in different ways.

The same facts shall be taken into consideration while assessing the quality of translation， in case of any types of manipulation or rendering. Resorting to discursive structures， one can’t consider such deviations from source text as mistranslation or wrong transformation of meaning. Concepts such as positive self-presentation and negative other presentation， to use Rahimi and Sahragard terms （2007）.

Discourse in this study was approached along with notions such as power and ideology， their effects on relations and how they affect the communication of the messages and thoughts. The effects of social and/or religious orientations of the author/translator in creating/ conveying the intended message and similar concepts which can be considered as vital factors in the way of assessment in this study based on discourse.

“Thus， CDA is concerned with the process of ideological struggles， examining the ways in which social realities are produced， reproduced， resisted， and transformed” （Mumby， 2004， p. 239）. It is the uncovering of implicit ideologies in texts. It unveils the underlying ideological prejudices and therefore， the exercise of power in texts （Widdoson， 2000）.

Van Dijk defined CDA as：

A type of discourse analytical research that primarily studies the way social power abuse， dominance， and inequality are enacted， reproduced， and resisted by text and talk in the social and political context. With such dissident research， critical discourse analysts take explicit position， and thus want to understand， expose， and ultimately resist social equality. （2001， p. 352）

The label CDA has come to refer to a particular branch of applied linguistics associated with some scholars mainly Roger Fowler， Norman Fairclough， Teun van Dijk and Ruth Wodak.

3. CDA FRAMEWORKS

3.1 Norman Fairclough： Discourse As Social Practice

According to Fairclough， CDA is a method for analyzing social and cultural modifications and manipulations， some features that could be used in standing against the power and the control of one group of people to be the superior ones. He believed that language is the way to shape the social identities， interactions， knowledge systems， and beliefs， also the fact that CDA is created by the same factor in return. In Language and Power （1989）， he called his approach critical language study and he mentioned the first aim of his approach as helping to correct the vast negligence in relation to the significance of language in creating， maintaining and changing the social relations of power.

This first aim as mentioned above was the theoretical part of Fairclough’s approach. His second goal which was helping to raise awareness to the question that how language can influence the dominance of one group of people over the others， could be considered as the practical aspect of his approach. According to him， this awareness is the first step towards emancipation. In order to reach this goal， he insisted on raising the level of people’s consciousness， since he assumed that in discourse， the subjects do not， strictly speaking， know what they are doing， actually they are unaware of the potential social impact of what they do or say.

3.2 Teun Van Dijk： A Socio-Cognitive Model

Teun Van Dijk is one of the most famous and dominant figures in the field of CDA. His critical works were mostly with the emphasis on prejudice and racism in discourse. He introduced plenty of discursive and pragmatic features and devices into this field， to include a few， positive selfrepresentation and negative other-representation which play a significant role specially recently in CDA studies.

Van Dijk asserted that he has no special school or approach. He believed that CDA shall not be considered as a branch of discourse analysis， the same as conversation analysis or psycho-discourse analysis； to support this claim， he suggested researchers to look at the CDA as an interdisciplinary and use the findings of other cultures， countries， and other humanities disciplines in studying and referring to CDA. Consequently， he labeled his methodology as sociocognitive discourse analysis which shows to what extent studying cognition is significant in CDA， communication， and interaction.

However， this does not mean that CDA is limited to cognitive and social analysis； rather， following the Van Dijk view and considering the real world problems， its complexities and people’s needs， CDA should have cultural， historical， social， logical and philosophical orientations as well.

His framework which was adopted from politics， ideology and discourse introduced 27 elements， namely， consensus， counter factual， disclaimers， distancing， empathy， euphemism， evidentiality， example/illustration， explanation， fallacies， generalization， hyperbole， implication， irony， lexicalization， metaphor， national self-glorification， negative other presentation， norm expression， number game， polarization， us-them categorization， positive self-presentation and populism into the realm of discourse and pragmatics.

3.3 Ruth Wodak： Sociological and Historical Approach to CDA

Ruth Wodak （2001） and his colleagues studied about the institutional relations and discourse barriers in courtrooms， school， and hospitals. They offered some guidelines to prevent the usage of sexist language and some guidelines for appropriate communication between the patient and doctor. Studies of Wodak and his colleagues in the field of anti-Semitism after the Second World War， introduced historical approach to CDA.

4. DISCOURSE AND PRAGMATICS AND THEIR CONTRIBUTION TO TQA

Critical discourse analysis deals with the relationship between discourse and power. Power in this current study was not the very political power as it reaches minds quickly， but here is an effort to find out that how do （more） powerful group/s control public discourse following Van Dijk’s CDA framework （2004） based on the fact that one of the ultimate goals of CDA research is to expose the manipulative strategies adopted by dominant groups to maintain social inequalities and injustices （Fairclough & Wodak， 1997； Van Dijk， 1996， 2001， 2006）.

Stressing issues like fidelity and accuracy， and remaining silent about the possibilities of the translator active intervention in the meaning transfer and codes of practice keep up the illusion of unmediated communication. Deep inside， the translator may doubt the validity of the code， and may even act against it， but the professional discourse allows the translator to hide behind a mask with a confident smile， hiding the doubts （Pym， 1997）.

This can be the very aim of applying discursive strategies in evaluation of the translation quality， to look for those doubts as perceived by the translator， to see how s/he managed to get along with those doubts and how they finally conveyed the source intended meaning， despite such doubts， but in a way or another without letting their end user to get to know any deviations from the source.

Fairclough （1991） who has made a great contribution to the establishment of CDA as a direction of research maintained that the text does not convey meaning through linguistic features but it is generated and realized by its discursive formations reflecting certain ideologies or given ways of controlling and manipulating power relations.

The brief summary as presented above in case of TQA， evaluation and equivalence showed that what discourse is trying to say is widely ignored in the way of assessing the translation quality. If this fact is accepted that translation is a communication， then it is obviously accepted that no communication will happen in isolation. It is in need of a message to be conveyed， the sender of this message and the receiver， and the one who has somehow the main role in this communication， the one who informs the receptor of the sender’s intended message. The author and the translator who encodes and decodes the message are also not in isolation， they have their own cultural background， social orientations and political views， and all of these factors will affect the way they will write and translate.

An effective manner of evaluation is the one which includes such factors and not a merely linguistic assessment. Especially for the sake of this study where a translated novel has been assessed， it was needed to widen this area of assessment， look deeply into the real nonlinguistic reasons behind every linguistic decision.

By adopting CDA with particular emphasis on pragmatic elements， the present investigation was an attempt to shed light on the relationship between language and discourse involved in translation in general， and more specifically， to uncover the underlying ideological assumptions invisible in the texts， both ST and TT， and consequently ascertain whether or not translator efforts result in a complete transfer of the discourse from source into target， Which has been called discourse equivalence by the researcher in this current study.

Alike discourse， pragmatics also focuses on structural study of the phrase and units larger than sentences， speech acts and conversational events. Pragmatics focus on context and its construction， analyzing the speakers/ writers intended meaning and how they might be manipulated/interpreted in different ways by different people and in different contexts.

According to McTear and Conti-Ramsden （1989）， pragmatics involves the three following aspects of language use：

The study of discourse and conversational skills.

The study of the relationship between pragmatics and other levels of language.

The study of situational determinants of the use of language.

Gaining some insights from this categorization， in this current study the focus was on the discourse and pragmatics， how these two have been tied together and how they would help to determine the language use.

The focus on the concept of pragmatics came from a bidirectional categorization proposed by Van Dijk （2004）， pragmatic and semantic macro structures. As Van Dijk（2004） defined these two concepts， pragmatic level of discourse deals with the macro-structures of the discourse. By macro-structures he meant the situation where sets of sentences or paragraphs and a whole discourse will together point to a general and global meaning in order to accomplish one speech act or the macro-speech act. The notion of macro speech act is necessary for understanding the cognitive process of discourse and speech acts in communicative interactions.

Also vital for all discourses and communications is the one who controls the topics （semantic macrostructures） and topic change， as when editors decide what news topics will be covered， professors decide what topics will be dealt with in class， or men control topics and topic change in conversations with women （Van Dijk， 1988）. The topics， or semantic macrostructures， define what the text is about， globally speaking a whole event and play a fundamental role in the production and comprehension of discourse. Thus the topic is the information that is best recalled of a text， and hence also plays a primary role in influencing the audience.

Pragmatically in discourse， speech act sequences can be analyzed at a global level. Therefore the sequence of speech acts is known as a whole onto one （or more） global speech acts of macro-speech acts. Thus， a whole paragraph in a novel might have a general topic of nature or architecture （semantic macro structure）， however it might denotes national self-glorification in term of discursive features （pragmatic macro structure） since those natural or architectural elements are used in order to glorify one nation. As Van Dijk （1977） mentioned， such a pragmatic macro-structure is a kind of reduction， it denotes the ultimate upshot of a paragraph for instance， e.g. in terms of the global intention and purpose.

Stories and in this study novel， is one of the events where in a pragmatic macro analysis is needed in order to be able to analyze the discursive strategies based on the whole and not distinctively based on single term or semantically by following sentences one by one to find one global topic.

This was also the main reason behind the method of data collection in this study， as single sentences or strings can hardly help to get to the main idea behind a combination of some linguistic items.

5. OBJECTIVES AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS

This study was about the assessment of the translation quality based on discursive/pragmatic strategies within the realm of CDA. The idea behind this study was not to quantify the amount of mismatches and errors for the sake of passing/failing any translated document， but to have an overall judgment of whether the discursive elements and in general discourse are transferable from the source text into the target text or not.

Since the parties involved in a discourse belong to different cultural backgrounds； taking the same fact into consideration， the purpose of this study was to identify if this is possible to transfer discourse from source into a target text in the process of translation， and how far manipulations might happen.

The main interest and the pivotal point of this study was the discursive and pragmatic properties of any original work and how successful the translator would be in transferring those properties with the least of deviations from the source text into the target text. Also the reasons behind decisions taken by the translator for following the author’s trend in choosing the same discursive features or skipping them and/or going for any other features； manipulating the author’s intended meaning and thought in a way or another， are discussed in details.

The first purpose of this study was to see whether it is possible to transfer discourse with the least of deviations from source into the target， considering the fact that discourse is a culture based concept which is tied with the cultural and ideological backgrounds of the parties’involved in a discoursal and pragmatic event.

The second purpose of this study was to find out how far manipulations will happen. Regarding the fact that deviations from the source is inevitable， this thesis aimed at exploring the reasons behind the manipulations done by the translator within a CDA framework， analyzing the discursive and pragmatic features of the original work and to see how the translator could manage to skip or modify those elements in different ways. Therefor this study sought to elaborate the two below hypothesis：

Discourse is a culture based concept， therefore seeking a constant and mutual discourse （discourse equivalence） between source and target text is impossible for the purpose of translation quality assessment （TQA）.

Manipulation in discourse is inevitable and it occurs in a way or another during the process of translation， regarding the discourse and pragmatics of language.

6. MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data in this empirical study came from the Farsi translation of the Lost Symbol， a 2009 novel by the American writer Dan Brown， translated by Hussein Shahrabi （2010）.

Thirty paragraphs were selected purposefully according to the discursive features and the pragmatic devices presented in the source document. Source paragraphs were separately read and if any special cultural， religious or political inclination were detected there in， those paragraphs were chosen for further inspections.

The reason behind such a selective manner was to make sure that the selected paragraphs surely have some discursive/pragmatic features for the sake of this study， since a random selection might not include the necessary amount of info needed for the purpose of assessment/ evaluation.

The next step followed by finding the related translated paragraphs and to understanding how those discursive/ pragmatic features were treated by the translator， which was later the basis of the main discussion and decision making process under this study.

The very reason of focusing on novel for the purpose of this study was not a literal study of the nature of novels and the discourse process there in， therefore the emphasis shifted from macrotextual aspects （different from macro and micro structures as proposed by Van Dijk）， including the paratext and metatext and will be forwarded to the detailed analysis of the discursive features which are based on the Van Dijk CDA framework （2004）.

This novel was rather a big source of data with hints and flashbacks to the real world， real places and people， and discursive features could be best explained when references to real world were present. Comparison between ideas and opinions in the field of religion and national belongings could be done best with a focus on euphemization as was proposed in this study and the investigation of how far the translator could keep a loyal and truthful attitude towards the source text and the source author and consequently what elements might hinder such an effort.

The main reason behind the method of data collection in this study was that stories and in this study novel， was one of the events where a pragmatic macro analysis was needed in order to be able to analyze the discursive strategies based on the whole and not distinctively based on a single term or semantically by following sentences one by one to find one global topic， thus single sentences or strings could hardly help to get to the main idea behind a combination of some linguistic items.

Following a complete comparison between the source and the target selected data and locating the discursive/ pragmatic features， the number of frequency of those strategies in the source were analyzed to see if the same number transferred into the target or not and in case of any deviations from the source， the frequency of deviation has been also noted out.

In order to analyze the results obtained from this study， data analysis has been done via SPSS. Chi-Square has been applied to analyze the collected data in order to gain the P-value.

In order to discuss the deviations from the source， two new concepts failure of rendering and adaptation were introduced to the analysis procedure.

Failure of rendering included instances where a discursive strategy was used in the source， but dropped in the target translation due to misunderstanding of the strategy or any other content related reasons， and adaptation covered instances were translation was done using another strategy/adding a new strategy （not presented in the source text）.

It was assumed that these manipulations both happen for improving the level of understanding for the end reader and to clear any traces of vagueness and ambiguity or to avoid any cultural， social or religious misunderstanding.

7. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Comparison between the frequencies in the source and target texts showed a small amount of difference which was due to some deviations from the source text by the translator for the lack of understanding and/or the need for making some slight changes in the translation.

The list of all the detected strategies along with their frequencies in the source and the target text and also their amount of deviation from source are all gathered in the below table （table 1） for more clarification.

Since the collected data and the studied strategies are shown in form of frequency in the source and the target text， the Chi-Square test of independence is applied which is an statistical analysis method used where the data consist of frequencies or counts

Since the number deviations from the source were very small， only 7 occurrences out of 86 which was the total number of frequencies in the source text， consequently this number did not affect the Chi-Square test result and the final statistics showed a 100% conformity between the source and the target text. Chi-Square calculation is shown in the below table：

As seen above， the P-value （Sig.） is 0.0 which is less than 0.05 and accordingly the main hypothesis of this study， discourse is a culture based concept， therefore seeking a constant and mutual discourse （discourse equivalence） between source and target text is impossible for the purpose of translation quality assessment， has been undeniably rejected with a high amount of dependency between source and target text.

As the results showed， 18 strategies out of 27 strategies proposed by Van Dijk in his CDA framework were located in the source and consequently located and elaborated in the target text. The results showed that the number of frequency of these strategies in the collected data was 86 in the source text and 87 in the target. There were 7 occurrences of deviation from the source.

Although the number of deviations from the source were so small that they did not affect the Chi-Square test results， however this can’t be ignored that deviations happened less or more and as a result the second hypothesis， manipulation in discourse is inevitable and it occurs in a way or another during the process of translation， regarding the discourse and pragmatics of language， has been approved.

The highest number of frequency went to national self-glorification with 14 occurrences， hyperbole and example/explanation/illustration/demonstration and implication both with 12 occurrences. This was not far from expectation， since the central topic in this novel was going to be supported in a rather indirect approach taking use of discursive/pragmatic strategies. Examples of these two strategies are followed：

ST： The U.S. Capitol Building stands regally at the eastern end of the National Mall， on a raised plateau that city designer Pierre L’Enfant described as “a pedestal waiting for a monument.” The Capitol’s massive footprint measures more than 750 feet in length and 350 feet deep. Housing more than sixteen acres of floor space， it contains an astonishing 541 rooms. The neoclassical architecture is meticulously designed to echo the grandeur of ancient Rome， whose ideals were the inspiration for America’s founders in establishing the laws and culture of the new republic.

Note： In this paragraph the phrases like 750 feet in length and 350 feet deep and more than sixteen acres of floor space can be categorized under number game strategy in ideological views， which is used here to put emphasis on the glory of the building. The Persian translator has done well by using expressions like ？？？？？？ ？？？？ （jaye paye ázim） and ？？？ ？ ？？？ ？？？？ ？？？？？？？ （saxteman ke bi？ áz ？ast o panj hezar metr morabá） and ？？？ ？？？？ ？？？？？？ ？？？？？ 1541 ？？？？ （ráqám-e heyrátángizi barabár ba 541 otaq） in transferring the intended meaning of the writer.

Also the way the author is describing one of the most famous buildings in the USA as stands regally， it contains an astonishing 541 rooms， the neoclassical architecture is meticulously designed to echo the grandeur of ancient Rome both are examples of hyperbole and national selfglorification.

ST： The forefathers who founded this capital city first named her “Rome.” They had named her river the Tiber and erected a classical capital of pantheons and temples， all adorned with images of history’s great gods and goddesses―Apollo， Minerva， Venus， Helios， Vulcan， Jupiter. In her center， as in many of the great classical cities， the founders had erected an enduring tribute to the ancients―the Egyptian obelisk. This obelisk， larger even than Cairo’s or Alexandria’s， rose 555 feet into the sky， more than thirty stories， proclaiming thanks and honor to the demigod forefather for whom this capital city took its newer name. Washington.

Note： The writer， by calling Washington， Rome and using hyperbolic expressions like “great gods and goddesses”， shows national self-glorification. The strategy example is used to add to the glorification by naming the gods and goddesses like Apollo， Minerva， Venus， Helios， Vulcan， and Jupiter.

Also the other strategy which was among the high frequency ones in the analyzed data was implication. The high frequency of this strategy showed some delicate style of writing from the author’s side. Though he was maneuvering on their national glories and values， but at the same time he tried to indirectly elaborate and refer to some critical points perhaps not wise to be clearly introduced in a hyperbolic way.

The discursive strategy implication came from the fact that pragmatic contextual is the main reason why discourse remains implicit. Accordingly recipients deduce and infer this implicit information by their attitudes， knowledge and their mental models （Rahimi & Sahragard， 2007）.

Regarding strategy example/explanation/illustration/ demonstration， the reason behind this large number of frequency came from two places. This was mainly due to the rather vague general idea and topic of the studied novel. Freemasonic might be a famous word worldwide， but people might have very few information about it. For the same reason， the author tried to bring more data wherever possible and needed， and the translator also conveyed these extra definitions wherever appeared in the source. Also， the examples and illustrations were good ways for pushing the readers focusing on some intended points， being absorbed by the real examples and accept the proposed idea easily with no interference.

Also the high number of this strategy had two literal/stylistic and/or discursive reasons. Discursively/ pragmatically this strategy is to give concrete examples， demonstrating vignettes and short stories， making general points reasonable， plausible and probable. This can be a strong tool in CDA talks where the people are actually bringing some witnesses to prove their own points.

However implication and example can be two ends of a continuum， one stands for vagueness and the other one stands for the effort to reduce the vagueness， these contradictory discursive strategies were beautifully set together without affecting the readership. It was in a way where the author kept things vague where he wished and explained more where he deemed advisable. An example for implication is followed：

ST： Langdon’s long-standing skepticism about the Masonic Pyramid was based largely on what it allegedly revealed―the location of the Ancient Mysteries. This discovery would have to involve an enormous vault filled with thousands upon thousands of volumes that had somehow survived the long-lost ancient libraries in which they had once been stored. It all seemed impossible. A vault that big？ Beneath D.C.？ Now， however， his recollection of Peter’s lecture at Phillips Exeter， combined with these lists of magic words， ha opened another startling possibility. Langdon most definitely did not believe in the power of magic words . . . and yet it seemed pretty clear that the tattooed man did. His pulse quickened as he again scanned the scrawled notes， the maps， the texts， the printouts， and all the interconnected strings and sticky notes.

/？ák-e tulani-e lengdan dárbare-ye herám-e masoni bi？tár bár ásas-e ？izi bud ke mi-goftánd qárar ást ef？a konad mákan-e ásrar-e bastani-e in ká？f./ /in ká？f motezámen-e in bud ke sárdabe-i ázim dár kar ba？ád ba hezaran jeld ketabi ke be náhvi áz ketabkhane-ye bastani va gom？ode-i ke zámáni dar an ánbar ？ode budánd， jan-e salem be dár borde ba？ánd./ /in ？izha namomken be názár mi-resid./ /sárdabe-i be an bozorgi？/ /zir-e va？ángton？//álan áma ba yadavári-e sokhánrani-e piter dár filipz eksterer hámrah ba in fehrest-e kálámat-e jadui， emkan-e heyrat angiz-e digári pi？ ke？ide bud./ /lengdan be hi？ vajh be qodrat-e kalamat-e jadui eteqad náda？t./ /áma vazeh bud ke márd-e khalkubi ？ode eteqad darad./ /yadda？t-ha vá náq？e-ha va motun ba pirint-ha ba báqie-ye rismanhaye motásel be ham vá kaqázhay-e ？ásbide ？od-e ra ke morur kárd záraban-e qálbá？ bala gereft./

Note： The writer implies some lists of magic words without any further clarification.

Other strategies were not either found or appeared with rather small quantities. Among them categorization can be named which was an important strategy in racist talk. Authors can easily categorize people into groups those who are praised and those who will be rejected by the community.

National self-glorification which was the most frequent strategy in this study， closely related to categorization. The results showed that national self-glorification can be indirectly the result of the categorization， or perhaps vice versa， but in any ways these two were closely related and supporting each other interchangeably.

The other strategies were appearing in the analyzed part of this novel with rather very small quantities. Though this did not lessen importance of those strategies in the realm of CDA， but relating to this current study， they were not of pivotal importance.

Euphemism includes situations where negative opinions about one person， group or party are often alleviated as a result of the positive self-presentation strategy and the avoidance of the negative impression formation. Also positive self-presentation is always in combination with the derogation of out groups. This is actually when the speaker or author is focusing on the strong points of themselves comparing to the weak points of the other’s， anyone or anything not inside their own group and party.

Euphemism along with lexicalization （in simple words， taking use of terms with negative connotation to describe the outer groups） and positive self-presentation all had the same number of frequency and the least of frequencies in this study. These strategies are among the widely used strategies in the CDA talks， however here the author used them so rarely. In completing the description of these strategies， they all have one feature in common； they are all in need of derogating the outer groups in a rather direct way.

For lexicalization it is clearly needed to introduce some terms with rather negative connotation in describing any one or any parties， euphemism is in need of a hyperbolic manifestation of some negative ideas， people events， etc. in a way to show the other group in a positive way. And positive self-presentation happens where a negative otherpresentation also happens at the same time. This strategy was also having the frequency number of 2 and among the least of recurring strategies.

Thus in any of these three strategies， a somehow obvious debate and struggle was presented， something that might be widely seen in everyday TV shows or forums over different hot topics， but not ideally appropriate for a novel which was going to be a lectern for glorifying a nation or religion. Therefore the author obviously refrained from using such debatable and further refutable strategies， and moved towards some strategies where peacefully and with the least of comparisons with outer groups， the in groups were shown in a positive and glorious way， national self-glorification， hyperbole and partly implication.

In the case of adaptation， the intended meaning is transferred， but by the aid of some other strategies and/or by adding a new strategy. The number of adaptations in this analyzed data was 4. An example followed：

ST： From the Crusades， to the Inquisition， to American politics―the name Jesus had been hijacked as an ally in all kinds of power struggles. Since the beginning of time， the ignorant had always screamed the loudest， herding the unsuspecting masses and forcing them to do their bidding. They defended their worldly desires by citing Scripture they did not understand. They celebrated their intolerance as proof of their convictions. Now， after all these years， mankind had finally managed to utterly erode everything that had once been so beautiful about Jesus.

/？e dár jáng-haye sálibi ？e dár táftish-e áqayed， ？e dár siasát-haye estesmari-e keshvár-e amrika - nam-e isaye másih ra robude budánd ta dár hár no jáng-e qodrat hámrah va hám ray-e khod konand./ /áz ázál， jahelan hámishe bolánd-tárin árbáde-ha ra sár mi-dadadánd vátudehay-e sade del ra gerd mi-avardánd vá majbureshan mi-kárdánd be avamere-shan gárdán begozaránd./ /ba náql kárdán az ketab-e moqadási ke ne-mi-fáhmidánd， áz arezuhay-e donyávi-eshan defa mi-kárdánd./ /nabordbarieshan ra be onvan-e sánádi bar iman-eshan mi-setudánd.//hala bád az in háme sal， báshar belákháre tásmim gerefte bud hár ？izi ra ke zámani zibai-e másih hesab mi-shod， pak konád./

Note： American politics is translated as ？？？？？？？？？？？？？ ？？？？ ？？？？？？ （siasát-haye estesmari-e keshvár-e amrika）. Translator clearly adds the term exploitation to his translation. Translator is taking use of the discursive strategy hyperbole/exaggeration by inserting an adjective which has a rather negative connotation.

The higher number of adaptation comparing to the failure of rendering is due to the discursive/pragmatic features and the requirements of the target audiences and culture， thus the translator in some parts had to made some modifications， though very small but inevitable indeed.

As far as there is no direct and bold insult or mock is done as for any outer group， the result of the application of these strategies can be tolerated and this was a tricky way of dealing with CDA in this novel. The author while never let the US nation and religion and Freemasonic ideas down， but at the same time tried not to point his finger directly toward any other non US group or people.

The findings of this study also showed that many distortions or transformations between the original and the two translated versions were not only arbitrary， but also ideologically encoded in the texts， with specific purposes and functions.

Since the studied novel was not a direct and purely political or religious oriented document， some of the CDA strategies including negative other representation were not applied by the author and consequently by the translator. Instead some so-called indirect strategies like example/ explanation/illustration/demonstration or national selfglorification were applied widely.

Statistical results showed that the translator could successfully transfer the discursive strategies into his work with the high percentage of 100%.

This safe movement very undeniably rejected the first hypothesis and showed that a transfer of discourse in general from source text into target text is possible even with the least of deviations and manipulations.

According to the results of this study it is possible to divide discursive strategies into two distinctive direct and indirect groups. It has been showed that discursive strategies national self-glorification， hyperbole， example/ explanation/illustration/demonstration and implication are the indirect strategies， they are assumed to be methods of praising or degrading the intended subject in rather an indirect way. There would be no direct pointing toward anyone， no insult or questioning others for their weak points in order to highlight the strong points of the oppositions， instead by glorifying some other ones good points， there would be no room indirectly to talk about the negative points of the rest of the subjects.

Again this praise would be done in an indirect manner， a whole nation would be praised in order to glorify one single person or religious group or party and not that intended person in a direct way.

The direct categorization includes negative other presentation and positive self-presentation， where some parties will be derogated so that some other ones are praised. It is highly possible to very frankly disregard some one’s ideas or abilities to help others become the winners.

There were also some other direct strategies with very few or zero frequencies in this study. It somehow showed the writing style of the author of the novel which has been manifested in the translator’s job as well， an indirect orientation toward his intended goals in writing his novel. There has been no single insult or questioning directly towards any person， group or nationality， instead he highlighted the good points as much as possible， so that the reader is absorbed in those beauty and luxuries in a way even if he wanted， and he could not accept the opposite， even if the opposite is the positive truth.

By and large， and despite the fact that the main hypothesis was not proved， but the very main objective in the study have been met， which was the study of the application of discursive strategies and the movement of discourse from source into target as a mean to assess the translation quality.

REFERENCES

Brown， D. （2009）. Lost symbol. US： Anchor Books.

Catford， J. C. （1965）. A linguistic theory of translation： An essay in applied linguistics. Oxford University Press.

Cyrus， L. （2009）. Old concepts， new ideas： Approaches to translation shifts. Retrieved from http：//repositori.uji.es/ xmlui/bitstream/handle/10234/11973/Cyrus_Old.pdf；jsess ionid=A84B9E2843C3FAD63B81466116A99413？sequen ce=1

Fairclough， N. （1989）. Language and power. London： Longman.

Fairclough， N. （1991）. What might we mean by ‘enterprise discourse’？. London： Routledge.

Fairclough， N. （1993）. Critical discourse analysis and the marketization of public discourse： The universities. London： Routledge.

Hajer， M. （1995）. The politics of environmental discourse： Ecological modernization and the policy process. Clarendon Press： Oxford.

House， J. （2001）. Translation Quality Assessment： linguistic description versus social evaluation. Meta， 46， 243-257

McTear， M.， & Conti-Ramsden， G. （1989）. Assessment of pragmatics. London： Taylor and Francis.

Mills， S. （1997）. Discourse. Routledge： London

Mumby， D. K. （2004）. Discourse， power， and ideology： Unpacking the critical approach. London： Sage.

Nida， E. A. （1964）. Towards a science of translating with special reference to principles and procedures involved in bible translating. Brill： Leiden.

Nida， E. A. & de Waard， J. （1986）. From one language to another： Functional equivalence in bible translating. Nashville： Thomas Nelson Publishers.

Nida， Eugene. （1995）. Dynamic Equivalence in Translating. In Sin-Wai Chan， & David E. Pollard （Eds.）， An encyclopedia of translation： Chinese-English -English-Chinese （pp.223-330）. Hong Kong： The Chinese University Press.

Pym， A. （1997）. Limits and frustrations of discourse analysis in translation theory. Retrieved from dialnet.unirioja.es/ descarga/articulo/91779.pdf

Rahimi， A. & Sahragard， R. （2007）. Critical discourse analysis. Tehran： Jungle publication.

Scriven， M. （2007）. The Logic of evaluation. Retrieved from http：//www.coris.uniroma1.it/news/files/Scriven_Logic_ evaluation.pdf

Snell-Hornby， M. （1988）. Translation studies. An integrated approach. Amsterdam and Philadelphia： John Benjamins.

Titscher， S.， Wodak， R.， Meyer， M.， & Vetter， E. （2000）. Methods of text and discourse analysis. London： Sage.

Toury， G. （1995）. Descriptive translation studies and beyond. Amsterdam： Benjamins.

Van Dijk， T.A. （1977）. Pragmatic macro structures in discourse and cognition. Retrieved from http：/// OldArticles/Pragmatic%20macrostructures%20in%20d%20 iscourse%20and%20cognition.pdf

Van Dijk， T.A. （1988）. News as discourse. Hillsdale， NJ： Erlbaum.

Van Dijk， T.A. （1993a）. Elite Discourse and Racism. Newbury Park， CA： Sage.

Van Dijk， T.A. （2001）. Critical discourse analysis. Cambridge， MA， and Oxford， UK： Blackwell.

Van Dijk， T.A. （2004）. Communicating. Frankfurt： Lang.

Widdowson， H. （2000）. Critical practices： On representation and the interpretation of text. Harlow： Pearson Education.

Wodak， R. （2001）. The discourse of historical approach. London： Sage Publication.

Zhongying， F. （1994）. Translation methods. Beijing： Foreign.